General Characteristics of Consonants

There are few ways of classifying English consonants. According to V.A.Vassilyev primary importance should be given to the type of obstruction and the manner of produc-tion of noise. On this ground he distinguishes two large classes of consonants:

occlusive, in the production of which a complete obstruc tion is formed;

1.

constrictive, in the production of which an incomplete obstruction is formed.

2.

The phonological relevance of this feature could be exempli fied in the following op -positions:

[ti] – [si] tea – sea (occlusive – constrictive) [si:d] – [si:z] seed – seas (occlusive – constrictive) [pul] – [ful] pull – full (occlusive —constrictive) [bəut] – [vəut] boat – vote (occlusive —constrictive)

Each of the two classes is subdivided into noise consonants and sonorants. The division is based on the factor of prevailing either noise or tone component in the auditory characteristic of a sound. In their turn noise consonants are divided into plosive conso-nants (or stops) and affricates.

Another point of view is shared by M.A. Sokolova, K.P. Gintovt, G.S. Tikhonova, R.M. Tikhonova. They suggest that the first and basic principle of classification should be the degree of noise. Such consideration leads to dividing English consonants into two general kinds: noise consonants and sonorants.

Sonorants are sounds that differ greatly from all other consonants of the language.

This is largely due to the fact that in their production the air passage between the two organs of speech is fairly wide, that is much wider than in the production of noise con-sonants. As a result, the auditory effect is tone, not noise. This peculiarity of articulation makes so norants sound more like vowels than consonants. On this ground some of the British phoneticians refer some of these con sonants to the class of semivowels, [r], [j], [w], for example. Acoustically sonorants are opposed to all other consonants be cause they are characterized by sharply defined formant struc ture and the total energy of most of them is very high. However, on functional grounds, according to their position in the syllable, [r], [j], [w] are included in the consonantal category, but from the point of view of their phonetic description they are more perfect ly treated as vowel glides.

The place of articulation is another characteristic of English consonants which should be considered from the phonological point of view. The place of articulation is determined by the ac tive organ of speech against the point of articulation. According to this principle the English consonants are classed into: labial, lingual, glottal. The class of labial consonants is subdivided into: a) bilabial; b) labio-dental; and among the class of

lingual consonants three subclasses are distinguished; they are: a) forelingual, b) medio-lingual and c) backmedio-lingual. The classification of consonants ac cording to this principle is illustrated in the following scheme:

The importance of this characteristic as phonologically rele vant could be proved by means of a simple example. In the sys tem of English consonants there could be found op-positions based on the active organ of speech and the place of obstruction.

[pæn] – [taen] pan – tan (bilabial – forelingual) [wai] – [lai] why – lie (bilabial – forelingual) [weil] – [jeil] weil – yale (bilabial – mediolingual) [pik] – [kik] pick – kick (bilabial – backlingual) [les] – [jes] less – yes (forelingual – mediolingual) [dei] – [gei] day – gay (forelingual – backlingual) [sai] – [hai] sigh – high (forelingual – glottal) [fi:t] – [si:t] feet – seat (labio-dental – forelingual)

Our next point should be made in connection, with another sound property, that is voiced — voiceless characteristic which depends on the work of the vocal cords. It has long been believed that from the articulatory point of view the distinction between such pairs of consonants as [p, b], [t, d], [k, g], [s, z], [f, v], [ʃ, Ʒ], [ʧ, ʤ] is based on the absence or pres ence of vibrations of the vocal cords, or on the absence or pres ence of voice or tone component. However, there is also energy difference. All voiced consonants are weak (lenis) and all voiceless consonants are strong (fortis).

According to the position of the soft palate consonants can be oral and nasal. There are relatively few consonantal types in English which require the lowered position of the soft palate. They are the na sal occlusive sonorants [m], [n] and [ŋ]. They differ from oral plosives in that the soft palate is lowered allowing the escape of air into the nasal cavity.

It is a well-known fact that no differences of meaning in English can be attributed to the presence or absence of nasalization. It is for this reason that it cannot be a phonologically relevant feature of English consonants, so it is an indispensable concomitant feature of English nasal consonants. Another problem of a phonological character in the English consonantal system is the problem of af fricates, that is their phonological status and their number.

The question is: what kind of facts a phonological theory has to explain?

Are the English [

1. ʧ, ʤ] sounds monophonemic entities or biphonemic combinations (sequences, clusters)?

If they are monophonemic, how many phonemes of the same kind exist in the 2.

system of English consonants, or, in other words, can such clusters as [tr, dr], [ʧ, ʤ] and [tθ, dð] be con sidered affricates?

Theoretically in each language there might be as many affricates as there are fricatives but in reality the number of them is limited and there are languages where there are none.

According to specialists in English phonetics, there are two affricates in English, they are: [ʧ, ʤ]. D. Jones points out there are six of them: [ʧ, ʤ], [ts, ʤ] and [tr, dr].

A.C. Gimson increases their number adding two more affricates: [tθ, dð].

The fact is that Ukrainian and Russian phoneticians look at English affricates through the eyes of a phoneme theory, according to which a phoneme has three aspects:

articulatory, acoustic and functional, the latter being the most significant one. As to Brit-ish phoneti cians, their primary concern is the articulatory-acoustic unity of these com-plexes, because their aim is limited by practical rea sons of teaching English.

According to N.S. Trubetskoy a sound complex may be considered nonphonemic if:

its elements belong to the same syllable;

1.

it is produced by one articulatory effort;

2.

its duration should not exceed normal duration of either of its elements.

3.

The grouping of the RP consonants according to the articulatory principles exempli-fied above may be illustrated in the table given below:

Table 2

Active organ, place of obstruction Type of

obstruction A manner of the production of noise

Labial

Lingual Pharyngal

Forelingual

Medio-lingual

Back lingual

bilabial labio-dental

inter-dental alveolar post-alveolar

palato-alveolar palatal velar glot tal

Occlusives

plosives p,b t,d k, g

nasal

son ants m n ŋ

Constrictives fric atives f,v θ, ð s,z ʃ, Ʒ h

son ants w l r j

Affri cates